Mr. Speaker, for the record, Reformers have long advocated increasing the budget for national defence by a billion dollars a year.

I want to wish the Prime Minister a very happy anniversary. Because the MP for York South—Weston expected his government to keep its campaign promise to scrap, kill and abolish the GST, three years ago today the Prime Minister kicked him out of the Liberal caucus.

What is the Prime Minister more proud of, the fact that he broke his promise to scrap the GST or the fact that he kicked out the one Liberal MP who had the character—

Mr. Speaker, what I am proud of is that we eliminated the deficit in Canada in three years. We had a deficit of $42 billion and it went to zero. We have had a 1% inflation rate for the past three years. We have created 1.6 million new jobs since we formed the government. Never have Canadians felt so good about their government than they do today. I know why the hon. member on the other side is so desperate.

Mr. Speaker, there is that Liberal arrogance again. I should remind the Prime Minister that he got 38% of the vote, which is hardly a huge mandate.

Not only has the government not scrapped, killed and abolished the GST, it is now using it to wring even more money out of taxpayers' pockets. The government now taxes $6 billion more a year through the GST than when it promised to scrap it.

How can the minister deny that his broken GST promise is anything more than a Liberal tax grab? I would like him to answer the question instead of getting into this trading of comments, back and forth, about national defence.

Mr. Speaker, he is the one who tried to set the record straight. With respect to defence, I have the Reform 1997 election platform, which calls for reduced spending for the Department of National Defence on page eight of a book called A Fresh Start for Canadians .

It is the same thing in The Taxpayers' Budget of February 21, 1995 which the Reform Party gave to the public. It was the same thing on November 24. A $1 billion reduction in—

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Adaptation and Rural Development Fund has just been approved for the next four years.

The $240 million envelope and the objective remain unchanged. The shocking difference is that Ontario will continue to receive the same amount, Quebec will get $16 billion less, and western Canada is the lucky winner in this lottery.

Mr. Speaker, I would refer the hon. member to the press release put out last week by the minister of agriculture for the province of Quebec, the Hon. Rémy Trudel, who complimented and congratulated the government for following the equitable formula on which to base the allocations to the provinces that was recommended by Quebec.

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian Adaptation and Rural Development Fund has been a development tool managed tightly by the Conseil pour le développement de l'agriculture du Québec in line with the fund's six priorities. The Conseil's management is the best in the country.

Why did the minister not look at the effectiveness of past management in approving new funds so as not to jeopardize ongoing projects?

Mr. Speaker, the Canadian adaptation and rural development fund that was put in place four years ago was done at a different time, when some adjustments were made in different parts of Canada for different reasons.

It was felt, primarily because of the urging of the ministry of agriculture of the province of Quebec, that we should go to an equitable formula and treat all provinces the same across the country, and that is exactly what we are doing.

Mr. Speaker, B.C. Liberal leader, Gordon Campbell, has accused Glen Clark's provincial NDP of “dropping the guillotine on democracy” by cutting off debate on the Nisga'a treaty. He has said “It is wrong to slam the door on the public”.

Does the government agree with Gordon Campbell, a Liberal, that Glen Clark's NDP has trashed the democratic process? Will it commit here and now not to table vitally important Nisga'a legislation until the people of British Columbia have had their full and democratic say on this treaty?

David IftodyLiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mr. Speaker, I would point out to the hon. member and to the House, and I find this quite interesting, that only a couple of weeks ago he was scolding the Government of Canada for moving too quickly ahead of the B.C. government.

Only two weeks ago at the standing committee the hon. member wanted us to increase the budget threefold to study the Nisga'a bill. He keeps changing his story. Every two weeks it is one way or the other. What does the hon. member want us to do? Let him clarify his question and not this side of the House.

David IftodyLiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mr. Speaker, we have never purported to interfere with the democratic process of the people of British Columbia and the due process that has to take place with respect to that legislation in their House.

What we have promised, through the Prime Minister and through my minister, is that when our time comes to do what we have to do in this House, we will do it, do it thoroughly, do it properly and live up to our obligations.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Human Resources Development is announcing, in conjunction with the Canadian Labour Congress, the striking of joint committee to address the problems caused by the employment insurance system.

When that committee has finished its work, the minister claims that there might possibly be no changes, because of a lack of political will.

My question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development. Is the minister referring to his own lack of political will, or his inability to sell the cabinet on the necessity of improving the system?

Mr. Speaker, it is a good thing the Bloc Quebecois members have no aspirations of forming a government some day, and are happy to form a perpetual opposition in this House, because I feel that they do not understand fully how government operates.

The Minister of Finance and I met with the Canadian Labour Congress yesterday, and they did indeed indicated their interest in taking part in a working group, along with employees of human resources development, as well as some from finance, in order to measure the impact of employment insurance reform on individuals and communities in Canada. I have every hope that this will be of use to all here.

Mr. Speaker, does the Minister of Human Resources Development share the opinion of the Minister of Finance who stated, upon leaving that meeting with the CLC, that in his opinion the employment insurance fund is nothing but an accounting mechanism.

Mr. Speaker, first of all, I would invite the hon. member for Québec to reread the Toronto Star article, because the Minister of Finance made no comment when he left yesterday's meeting. The comment was reported by others who were in attendance. She should, therefore, reread the article.

What I can say is that, rising above all the petty gossip and the petty politicking, there is a will within our government to serve the workers of our country well.

I am very pleased with the working group we are setting up in conjunction with the Canadian Labour Congress, and it is entirely up to the Bloc Quebecois if they wish to prefer to stick with their pointless oppositional attitude.

David IftodyLiberalParliamentary Secretary to Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development

Mr. Speaker, here we go again.

I would only say to the hon. member that she may want to ask her lead critic why he stands in the House of Commons complaining and fearful that we might be acting ahead of the people of British Columbia, when in the standing committee he was arguing to have the budget tripled and to move quickly on the Nisga'a treaty. Which is it?